United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
SURGICAL CENTER OF SOUTHFIELD, L.L.C., d/b/a Fountain View Surgery Center, and ISPINE, P.L.L.C., Plaintiffs,
ALLSTATE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.
Gershwin A. Drain District Judge.
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM ISPINE (ECF
ANTHONY P. PATTI UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
filed this lawsuit, which alleges a violation of
Michigan's No-Fault Act and seeks declaratory relief,
against Defendant in Wayne County Circuit Court on April 26,
2019. (ECF 1-2.) Among other things, Plaintiffs allege that
. . . provided surgical services and surgical facility
medical treatment to the insured [B. Slating] during a
surgical procedure performed on February 28, 2019, for the
injuries arising out of [an August 28, 2018] motor vehicle
(ECF 1-3 at 4 ¶ 14.)
removed the case to this Court on May 17, 2019. (ECF 1.) Each
of the parties is represented by counsel. (ECFs 3, 4,
On July 31, 2019, Judge Drain entered a stipulated
confidentiality, protective, and clawback order. (ECF 9.)
That same day, a stipulated order was entered, dismissing
without prejudice the “claims for medical services
relating to Surgical Center of Southfield d/b/a Fountain View
Surgery” and further stating that:
Plaintiff Surgical Center of Southfield d/b/a Fountain View
Surgery Center and Allstate shall resolve their dispute
regarding Surgical Center of Southfield d/b/a Fountain View
Surgery Center's fees related to patient Brian Slating
through the case Surgical Center of Southfield, LLC d/b/a
Fountain View Surgery Center (Brian Slating) v. Allstate
Insurance Company, 19-cv-10991-PDB-APP (E.D. Mich.) and
not in any other litigation, including the instant case and
any suit filed by Brian Slating against Allstate.
(ECF No. 10, PageID.96-97.)
before the Court is Defendant's motion to compel
discovery from ISpine (ECF 22), which concerns Plaintiff
ISpine's answers to Defendant's interrogatories (ECF
22-3) and Plaintiff ISpine's answers to Defendant's
requests for production of documents (ECF 22-4). Judge Drain
referred this motion to me for hearing and determination. On
September 26, 2019, I entered a text-order, which resulted in
the Clerk's Office striking the response and reply.
(See ECFs 27-29, 31-32.) Thus, other than the motion
itself, I have only considered the September 27, 2019 joint
list of unresolved issues and the oral argument of counsel.
October 2, 2019, I conducted a hearing, at which attorneys
Jason Hagelthorn and Andrew H. DeNinno appeared. (ECFs 24,
considered the motion papers and counsel's oral argument,
and in harmony with my rulings and reasoning given from the
bench, all of which areincorporated herein by
reference as though fully restated herein,
Plaintiff's motion to ...